1. As to Defendant A’s ground of appeal

A. The crime of acceptance of bribe is the legal interest directly protected by the law of bribery in relation to the process of performance of duties and the trust of the society. As such, the crime of acceptance of bribe is established when the total amount of money of a public official's duties and money is in a quid pro quo relationship, and there is no need to consider the existence of solicitation and the quid pro quo relationship for individual duties. Moreover, there is no need to specify the duty.

In addition, the duties in the crime of bribery include not only the duties under the jurisdiction of a public official themselves, but also the duties closely related to such duties, such as custom or actual duties under the jurisdiction of a person having authority to make a decision, and duties that may assist or affect such person (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do13584, Dec. 23, 2010). Meanwhile, in a case where the appellate court reverses and renders a judgment of the first instance by ex officio deliberation on the grounds not included in the grounds for appeal, it shall be deliberated and judged as a fact-finding court as to the fact-finding and application of law as to the guilt of the defendant case, and the legitimacy of the grounds for appeal asserted by the appellant is deemed to have been determined in the trial and determination process of the above defendant case, and it shall not

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 87Do82, Aug. 9, 198; 2010Do11338, Sept. 13, 2012). The lower court ex officio reversed and sold the part concerning Defendant A among the facts charged in the instant case, and convicted Defendant A of acceptance of KRW 8 million from AB in the meaning of a case regarding AD re-insurance solicitation, etc.